Why not eat horses? Part 3.
Nov. 17th, 2006 06:54 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
urbpanPart one: http://urbpan.livejournal.com/116289.html
Part two: http://urbpan.livejournal.com/364068.html
Long story short: I signed on to the United Animal Nations mailing list shortly after Katrina, because they offer animal rescue workshops, and I wanted to attend one near me (they've all been out of range so far). But one of the recurring emails I've been getting from them is a plea to help them make the slaughter and export of horses illegal. My feeling is that horses don't deserve more rights than cows or pigs, and that this is not a "rescue" issue. I got another email recently on the subject, and I shot back an angry reply:
I don't see why I should help any particular group of domestic animals from being slaughtered and made into food. You aren't suggesting that we rescue the millions of cows and pigs that are slaughtered every year. I signed on to UAN after Katrina, hoping to receive training to help rescue animals that are in need of help because of disasters and the like. The normal processing of animals into food is not a rescue situation. If you insist on being more like PETA than a real rescue organization, no one is going to take you seriously.
Thanks anyway,
Jef Taylor
And, to my astonishment, I got a reply from an actual person:
Dear Jef,
Thank you for your feedback on our efforts to help pass the House Slaughter Prevention Act, and thank you for supporting our efforts to help animals after Katrina. I appreciate hearing your opinion and having the opportunity to clarify our position.
You are correct in your statement that UAN does not expect to stop the slaughter of farm animals. However, UAN considers horses to be more akin to companion animals than farm animals. For many of our members, and the majority of Americans, eating horses would be similiar to eating dogs or cats. The American people would likewise not stand by quietly if animal shelters began slaughtering dogs and shipping their meat to Vietnam instead of adopting them out into new homes.
Secondly, UAN opposes all cruelty to animals, not necessarily the eating of animals. Therefore, we do support efforts to increase the humane housing, transportation and slaughter of farm animals, although our programs currently do not focus on these issues.
We believe horse slaughter in this country is unnecessary and inhumane. While it is possible to humanely stun an animal with a captive bolt, in the case of scared and skittish horses, this is extremely difficult to do humanely, especially among unskilled slaughterhouse workers. Horses are far more adept than cattle at being able to raise their heads quickly to avoid the blow to the head; therefore, workers frequently miss and horses are rendered while still conscious. In addition, because there are only 3 slaughterhouses in this country, horses are transported long distances without adequate food or water and are housed together in stressful conditions-- in unfamiliar herds for long periods of time before being slaughtered. In addition, most of the horses arriving at slaughterhouses are not ill or sick, most are purchased at auction in good condition--some are stolen, some are from the PMU industry, some are bred for the purpose, some are sold by people who have no idea the person who bought their horse was a "killer buyer."
UAN holds the position that if a horse needs to be euthanized, this should be done humanely, and horse slaughter is not humane euthanasia. The most humane method for horse owners to have their animals euthanized is done by a veterinarian. This choice is up to horse owners, but I believe if horse owners bore witness to the horse slaughter process, they would choose humane euthanasia instead. I encourage you to watch some of the video clips at the link for more information.
http://www.animalchannel.net/
Thank you again for your feedback.
Sincerely,
Nicole Forsyth
President & CEO
United Animal Nations
www.uan.org
Pretty good answer. I haven't seen the video since it's not Mac-friendly, but it bears noticing that the "Animal Channel" is the HSUS, an organization that slides further toward the crazy end of the animal protection specturm every day, not anything to do with cable t.v. Maybe I'll try to watch it during my lunch break (I'm sure it's appetizing) at work, on the pc. I'd also like to see Hulk Hogan's take on animal fighting, "oooh YEAHH!" And see once and for all what the seal hunt is like. (These are the actual three videos at the animalchannel.net link on the HSUS site). I have heard passionate arguments against the seal hunt and reasoned defenses of it--right here in the comments of my journal!
I don't know if I buy the argument that it's impossible to humanely slaughter horses. It's an intriguing argument, but if its the case, then they should be arguing for developing humane slaughter, not prohibition of slaughter. And on the other question, what about dogs and cats, would I want them to be slaughtered and sold to cat and dog eating countries? Is that worse than sending the millions of shelter cats and dogs up the incinerator chimney every year? Dead is dead, let someone eat them rather than letting them contribute to global warming. Of course, then you run into the humane slaughter issue again. Maybe we need to find a way to denature Euthasol, so that we can eat animals that have been put to sleep, without poisoning ourselves.
Any thoughts on any of this?
Part two: http://urbpan.livejournal.com/364068.html
Long story short: I signed on to the United Animal Nations mailing list shortly after Katrina, because they offer animal rescue workshops, and I wanted to attend one near me (they've all been out of range so far). But one of the recurring emails I've been getting from them is a plea to help them make the slaughter and export of horses illegal. My feeling is that horses don't deserve more rights than cows or pigs, and that this is not a "rescue" issue. I got another email recently on the subject, and I shot back an angry reply:
I don't see why I should help any particular group of domestic animals from being slaughtered and made into food. You aren't suggesting that we rescue the millions of cows and pigs that are slaughtered every year. I signed on to UAN after Katrina, hoping to receive training to help rescue animals that are in need of help because of disasters and the like. The normal processing of animals into food is not a rescue situation. If you insist on being more like PETA than a real rescue organization, no one is going to take you seriously.
Thanks anyway,
Jef Taylor
And, to my astonishment, I got a reply from an actual person:
Dear Jef,
Thank you for your feedback on our efforts to help pass the House Slaughter Prevention Act, and thank you for supporting our efforts to help animals after Katrina. I appreciate hearing your opinion and having the opportunity to clarify our position.
You are correct in your statement that UAN does not expect to stop the slaughter of farm animals. However, UAN considers horses to be more akin to companion animals than farm animals. For many of our members, and the majority of Americans, eating horses would be similiar to eating dogs or cats. The American people would likewise not stand by quietly if animal shelters began slaughtering dogs and shipping their meat to Vietnam instead of adopting them out into new homes.
Secondly, UAN opposes all cruelty to animals, not necessarily the eating of animals. Therefore, we do support efforts to increase the humane housing, transportation and slaughter of farm animals, although our programs currently do not focus on these issues.
We believe horse slaughter in this country is unnecessary and inhumane. While it is possible to humanely stun an animal with a captive bolt, in the case of scared and skittish horses, this is extremely difficult to do humanely, especially among unskilled slaughterhouse workers. Horses are far more adept than cattle at being able to raise their heads quickly to avoid the blow to the head; therefore, workers frequently miss and horses are rendered while still conscious. In addition, because there are only 3 slaughterhouses in this country, horses are transported long distances without adequate food or water and are housed together in stressful conditions-- in unfamiliar herds for long periods of time before being slaughtered. In addition, most of the horses arriving at slaughterhouses are not ill or sick, most are purchased at auction in good condition--some are stolen, some are from the PMU industry, some are bred for the purpose, some are sold by people who have no idea the person who bought their horse was a "killer buyer."
UAN holds the position that if a horse needs to be euthanized, this should be done humanely, and horse slaughter is not humane euthanasia. The most humane method for horse owners to have their animals euthanized is done by a veterinarian. This choice is up to horse owners, but I believe if horse owners bore witness to the horse slaughter process, they would choose humane euthanasia instead. I encourage you to watch some of the video clips at the link for more information.
http://www.animalchannel.net/
Thank you again for your feedback.
Sincerely,
Nicole Forsyth
President & CEO
United Animal Nations
www.uan.org
Pretty good answer. I haven't seen the video since it's not Mac-friendly, but it bears noticing that the "Animal Channel" is the HSUS, an organization that slides further toward the crazy end of the animal protection specturm every day, not anything to do with cable t.v. Maybe I'll try to watch it during my lunch break (I'm sure it's appetizing) at work, on the pc. I'd also like to see Hulk Hogan's take on animal fighting, "oooh YEAHH!" And see once and for all what the seal hunt is like. (These are the actual three videos at the animalchannel.net link on the HSUS site). I have heard passionate arguments against the seal hunt and reasoned defenses of it--right here in the comments of my journal!
I don't know if I buy the argument that it's impossible to humanely slaughter horses. It's an intriguing argument, but if its the case, then they should be arguing for developing humane slaughter, not prohibition of slaughter. And on the other question, what about dogs and cats, would I want them to be slaughtered and sold to cat and dog eating countries? Is that worse than sending the millions of shelter cats and dogs up the incinerator chimney every year? Dead is dead, let someone eat them rather than letting them contribute to global warming. Of course, then you run into the humane slaughter issue again. Maybe we need to find a way to denature Euthasol, so that we can eat animals that have been put to sleep, without poisoning ourselves.
Any thoughts on any of this?
